Article • Data Bytes
Federal Support for Community-Driven Relocation: Progress and Possibilities

Article • Data Bytes
Fact-based, data-driven research and analysis to advance democratic debate on vital issues shaping people’s lives.
Center for Economic and Policy Research
1611 Connecticut Ave. NW
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20009
Tel: 202-293-5380
Fax: 202-588-1356
https://cepr.net
In December, the White House released a report* on ways the federal government can support community-driven relocation efforts in areas that experience repeated climate-driven disasters. The report was a collaborative effort by a multiagency subcommittee — involving FEMA, the Department of the Interior, and the White House Council on Environmental Quality — whose goal was to develop whole-of-government solutions to help communities in risky areas.
In the past, acquisition and relocation efforts have been called “managed retreat.” So what is community-driven relocation, and how does it differ from managed retreat? In the case of managed retreat, localities have criticized the phrase for representing “defeat” or the act of giving up. A retreat suggests running away rather than a methodical approach involving all stakeholders. The term “relocation,” despite its negative historical connotations involving the government removing people from their land, has often been suggested as an alternative to “managed retreat.” A report released in early 2024 by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) instead examined, particularly in Gulf Coast communities, the idea of “community-driven relocation,” which offers a more just, bottom-up organizing model for conversations about relocation.
However, one current problem is tracking existing efforts. There is no single source of federal funding for relocation. According to the White House report, a variety of federal agencies currently fund relocation efforts, including various FEMA programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development block grants, Department of Interior awards for tribal climate resilience, Department of Agriculture’s Emergency Watershed Protection Program, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund, right-of-way relocations by the US Army Corps of Engineers, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Coastal Resilience Fund. If this is confusing, it’s not just you. The organizational chart for disaster recovery efforts at the federal level is mind-bogglingly complex (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Recovery support functions and the federal entities involved in disaster recovery
Source: “Opportunities for Federal Support of Community-Driven Relocation” White House, December 2024.
So, how can the federal government streamline efforts to support communities? The interagency report identifies several potential policy and investment opportunities to improve support for community-driven relocation. One top objective is establishing a single entry point for communities to access federal funding and technical assistance. Other goals include:
Figure 2
Another hurdle exists outside the federal government’s control. Politicians at the local, state, and congressional levels have largely avoided the discussion of relocation. There are many potential reasons for this: declining tax revenue as residents and businesses move away, the reshaping of voting blocs and potentially electoral districts, and the complex issue around property rights and compensation. For the federal government, how can agencies empower communities to turn relocation from a political problem, where the debate only exists among policymakers, to a constituent problem, where residents become the primary drivers of conversation? There’s no easy answer. Local governments ultimately make all land use and development decisions, so relocation efforts must start there.
The federal government can significantly support community-driven relocation efforts by streamlining funding, providing technical assistance, and encouraging collaborative efforts between policymakers and communities. The White House’s report is a good first step. Hopefully, federal action will continue under the incoming Trump Administration. But the real responsibility lies with policymakers at all levels of government to play a role by understanding that climate-change adaptation is a long-term action that extends beyond their current term in office.
*Please note: The White House has removed the original report so we are now making it available on our server.